Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Validation and analysis of turbulence modeling in pipe elbow under secondary flow conditions

  • Review
  • Published:
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present work proposes to analyze the performance of five eddy-viscosity turbulence models in predicting an internal single-phase incompressible turbulent flow through an elbow pipe. Validation is achieved by comparison with LES and experimental benchmark results. Particular emphasis is placed in the study of the velocity fields under challenging conditions in terms of turbulence modeling. Ultimately, the analysis aims to determine the most adequate model among the analyzed ones in terms of accuracy, envisioning further application in multiphase flows. Results show that the SST closure is the most appropriate turbulence model to predict the velocity profile in regions of significant streamline curvature, whereas, in the presence of high adverse pressure gradients, the most appropriate one is the realizable \(k-\epsilon\) model. Furthermore, a quantitative analysis suggests that a modification to the \(F_{1}\) blending function in the SST model may improve the mean velocity agreement with LES benchmark results in the near-wall region located downstream of the bend.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bradshaw P (1987) Turbulent secondary flows. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 19:53–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bredberg J (2000) On the wall boundary condition for turbulence models. Chalmers University of Technology, Department of Thermo and Fluid Dynamics. Internal Report 00/4. Goteborg

  3. Breunig J (2017) Which turbulence model should you use for your CFD analysis? https://www.xceed-eng.com/which-cfd-turbulence-model/

  4. Carneiro J, Kaufmann V, Polifke W (2009) Numerical simulation of droplet dispersion and evaporation with a moments-based CFD model. In: Proceeding of 20th international congress of mechanical engineering, pp. 15–20

  5. Celik I, Ghia U, Roache P, Freitas C (2008) Procedure for estimation and reporting of uncertainty due to discretization in CFD applications. J Fluids Eng Trans ASME. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2960953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Conde K (2018) Geração de malhas para geometrias complexas e problemas conjugados de transferência de calor em coletores solares híbridos aletados. Ph.D. thesis, Realização de Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica. São José dos Campos: ITA

  7. Darwish M, Moukalled F (2016) The finite volume method in computational fluid dynamics. Springer, Cham

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Davidson L (2015) An introduction to turbulence models

  9. Duraisamy K, Spalart P, Rumsey C (2017) Status, emerging ideas and future directions of turbulence modeling research in aeronautics. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Langley Research Center, Langley

    Google Scholar 

  10. Durbin P, Speziale C (1991) Local anisotropy in strained turbulence at high reynolds numbers. ASME Trans J Fluids Eng 113:707–709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fontoura D, Matos E, Nunhez J (2013) A three-dimensional two-phase flow model with phase change inside a tube of petrochemical pre-heaters. Fuel 110:196–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fox R, McDonald A, Mitchell J (2020) Introduction to fluid mechanics. Wiley, London

    Google Scholar 

  13. Greenshields C OpenFOAM v7 User Guide. The OpenFOAM Foundation. https://cfd.direct/openfoam/user-guide-v7/

  14. Hellsten A (1998) Some improvements in Menter’s k-\(\omega\) sst turbulence model. In: 29th AIAA fluid dynamics conference, p. 2554

  15. Jones W, Launder B (1972) The prediction of laminarization with a two-equation model of turbulence. Int J Heat Mass Transf 15(2):301–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kalpakli A, Örlü R (2013) Turbulent pipe flow downstream a 90 pipe bend with and without superimposed swirl. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 41:103–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kim J, Yadav M, Kim S (2014) Characteristics of secondary flow induced by 90-degree elbow in turbulent pipe flow. Eng Appl Comput Fluid Mech 8(2):229–239

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kok J (1999) Resolving the dependence on free-stream values for the k-\(\omega\) turbulence model. Tech. rep., NLR-TP-99295

  19. Larsson I, Lindmark E, Lundström T, Nathan G (2011) Secondary flow in semi-circular ducts. J Fluids Eng 133 (10)

  20. Launder B, Sharma B (1974) Application of the energy-dissipation model of turbulence to the calculation of flow near a spinning disc. Lett Heat Mass Transf 1(2):131–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Launder B, Spalding D (1974) The numerical computation of turbulent flows. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 3(2):269–289

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. van Leer B (1974) Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme. II. Monotonicity and conservation combined in a second-order scheme. J Comput Phys 14(4):361–370

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Masterov M, Baltussen M, Kuipers J (2018) Numerical simulation of a square bubble column using detached eddy simulation and Euler-Lagrange approach. Int J Multiph Flow 107:275–288

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Mathieu A, Nagel T, Bonamy C, Chauchat J, Cheng Z, Liu X, Hsu T (2018) Application of a Eulerian two-phase flow model to scour processes. In: E3S web of conferences, vol. 40, p. 05015. EDP Sciences

  25. Menter F (1992) Influence of freestream values on k-\(\omega\) turbulence model predictions. AIAA J 30(6):1657–1659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Menter F (1994) Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA J 32(8):1598–1605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Menter F, Kuntz M, Langtry R (2003) Ten years of industrial experience with the sst turbulence model. Turbul Heat Mass Transf 4(1):625–632

    Google Scholar 

  28. Oberkampf W, Trucano T (2002) Verification and validation in computational fluid dynamics. Prog Aerosp Sci 38(3):209–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Orszag S, Yakhot V (1989) Renormalization group analysis of turbulence. In: Proceedings of the international congress of mathematicians, pp. 1395–1399

  30. Perini F, Zha K, Busch S, Reitz R (2017) Comparison of linear, non-linear and generalized rng-based k-\(\epsilon\) models for turbulent diesel engine flows. Tech. rep, SAE Technical Paper

  31. Pope S (2001) Turbulent flows. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Röhrig R, Jakirlić S, Tropea C (2015) Comparative computational study of turbulent flow in a 90 pipe elbow. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 55:120–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rumsey C (2015) The Menter shear stress transport turbulence model. https://turbmodels.larc.nasa.gov/sst.html

  34. Schlichting H (1968) Boundary layer theory, vol 960. Springer, Cham

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Shih T (1993) A realizable Reynolds stress algebraic equation model, vol. 105993. National Aeronautics and Space Administration

  36. Shih T, Liou W, Shabbir A, Yang Z, Zhu J (1994) A new k-\(\epsilon\) eddy viscosity model for high reynolds number turbulent flows: model development and validation. Tech. rep, NASA Sti/recon Technical Report N

  37. Slotnick J, Khodadoust A, Alonso J, Darmofal D, Gropp W, Lurie E, Mavriplis D (2014) CFD vision 2030 study: a path to revolutionary computational aerosciences

  38. Sommerfeld M, Lain S (2012) Analysis of dilute phase pneumatic conveying through pipe systems by the Euler/Lagrange approach. In: Ninth international conference on CFD in the minerals and process industries, pp. 1–12

  39. Sudo K, Sumida M, Hibara H (1998) Experimental investigation on turbulent flow in a circular-sectioned 90-degree bend. Exp Fluids 25(1):42–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Versteeg H, Malalasekera W (2007) An introduction to computational fluid dynamics: the finite volume method. Pearson education

  41. Wilcox D (1998) Turbulence modeling for CFD, vol 2. DCW industries La Canada, CA

    Google Scholar 

  42. Yakhot V, Orszag S, Thangam S, Gatski T, Speziale C (1992) Development of turbulence models for shear flows by a double expansion technique. Phys Fluids A 4(7):1510–1520

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Yeoh G, Tu J (2019) Computational techniques for multiphase flows. Butterworth-Heinemann

  44. Zhao M, Zhang X, Wen X, Wang J, Liu C, Wan D (2019) CFD simulation of multiphase flow at different scales. In: The 3rd international symposium of cavitation and multiphase flow, Shanghai, China, pp. 19–22

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge Petrobras for funding the Flushing Project (CENPES/PDDP/TFCM-SEQUI Project No. 2018/00017-4) and the National Laboratory for Scientific Computing (LNCC/MCTI, Brazil) for providing HPC resources of the SDumont supercomputer, which have contributed to the research results reported within this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica, São José dos Campos, SP, 12228-900, Brazil

    Ana Cristina Neves Carloni, Kevin Eduardo de Conde & Domingos Alves Rade

  2. Departamento de Engenharia Mecânica, Universidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho”, Ilha Solteira, SP, 15385-000, Brazil

    Aluisio Viais Pantaleão

  3. Instituto de Aeronáutica e Espaço, São José dos Campos, SP, 12228-903, Brazil

    João Luiz F. de Azevedo

Authors
  1. Ana Cristina Neves Carloni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kevin Eduardo de Conde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Aluisio Viais Pantaleão
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. João Luiz F. de Azevedo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Domingos Alves Rade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana Cristina Neves Carloni.

Additional information

Technical Editor: Erick Franklin.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Carloni, A.C.N., Conde, K.E.d., Pantaleão, A.V. et al. Validation and analysis of turbulence modeling in pipe elbow under secondary flow conditions. J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 44, 595 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-022-03899-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-022-03899-9

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Search

Navigation